Enter your email to subscribe:

The New York Appellate Division for the First Judicial Department has held that the plaintiff in a legal malpractice case has stated a claim arising out of the defendant law firm's representation in a private placement adoption.

The plaintiff is not entitled to summary judgment due to disputed factual issues.

There is also this issue:

Issues of fact also exist as to whether plaintiffs' relationship with defendants ended on December 24, 2003, when they voided a check paid to defendants, rendering plaintiffs' legal malpractice cause of action, commenced on December 27, 2006, time-barred.